From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Feb  1 12:18:10 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0442CC32
 for <net@freebsd.org>; Fri,  1 Feb 2013 12:18:10 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from melifaro@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from mail.ipfw.ru (unknown [IPv6:2a01:4f8:120:6141::2])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A85DAE6
 for <net@freebsd.org>; Fri,  1 Feb 2013 12:18:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [2a02:6b8:0:401:222:4dff:fe50:cd2f]
 (helo=dhcp170-36-red.yandex.net)
 by mail.ipfw.ru with esmtpsa (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256)
 (Exim 4.76 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <melifaro@FreeBSD.org>)
 id 1U1Fch-000JHF-A6; Fri, 01 Feb 2013 16:21:39 +0400
Message-ID: <510BB26B.9040807@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 16:17:47 +0400
From: "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vijay Singh <vijju.singh@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why call ETHER_BPF_MTAP on Tx when not tracing
References: <CALCNsJSsHt52tNRJh_-X8Ybqsr+bN8fnm1puTspxq4J4Goc2Og@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALCNsJSsHt52tNRJh_-X8Ybqsr+bN8fnm1puTspxq4J4Goc2Og@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <net@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 12:18:10 -0000

On 01.02.2013 10:09, Vijay Singh wrote:
> I see that BPFIF_LOCK() in bpf_mtap() is getting invoked, even
> though I am not tracing the interface. Is this expected?
This should not happen, since BPF_MTAP macro checks if BFP consumers
are present (via bpf_peers_present()) before calling bpf_mtap.

Btw, locking model is different in -current, you can take a look on
BPF changes in head starting from r233937.

> 
> -vijay
> 
> PS: I am running 8.2. 
> _______________________________________________ 
> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list 
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To
> unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
> 


-- 
WBR, Alexander